Tango01 | 20 Jun 2015 11:22 p.m. PST |
"U.S. allies are happy to have the A-10 Warthog attack aircraft back in Europe to counter a resurgent Russia, airmen here at the Paris Air Show said. The Defense Department brought the Cold War-era tank busters stateside in 2013 as part of a consolidation of bases and equipment in Europe. But it sent them back to the continent as part of a theater security package earlier this year -- including countries in the former Soviet bloc -- in response to Russia's annexation of Crimea from Ukraine and support for pro-Russian separatists. The planes have been a welcome sight during training exercises involving NATO forces in the Czech Republic, Poland, Estonia and Romania, among other countries, according to crew members…" Full article here link Amicalement Armand |
jpattern2 | 21 Jun 2015 6:34 a.m. PST |
Interesting. One of the pilots says, regarding potential retirement of the A-10s and transitioning to the F-35s: They haven't told us because it's not official yet. It's sort of the expectation though that since the F-35 is the future that we'd go there and then take our CAS knowledge to the table and make sure that community is well versed in it. That's a good attitude to have. At least the CAS experience won't be tossed aside. The comments on the article, both pro-Warthog and con, are also interesting, except for the (predictable) political ones on both sides. |
jpattern2 | 21 Jun 2015 6:34 a.m. PST |
Well, that was interesting, too. I pressed Submit once, and the exact same post was posted twice. |
Tango01 | 21 Jun 2015 11:08 a.m. PST |
Glad you found it interesting boys. Amicalement Armand |
Legion 4 | 21 Jun 2015 5:33 p.m. PST |
Everybody likes the A-10 but the guys who have to fly'm it seems … |
Lion in the Stars | 21 Jun 2015 7:48 p.m. PST |
No, L4, the guys who fly them love 'em. It's the flag-rank officers that hate them. |
Mako11 | 21 Jun 2015 11:53 p.m. PST |
Yep, zoomie brass don't think they're sexy enough. Can't see why they'd back the F-35 really either (since it's a dog), other than for those lucrative, post-military retirement careers with either the manufacturers, and/or their lobbyists. "Follow the money……". |
Legion 4 | 22 Jun 2015 6:23 a.m. PST |
No, L4, the guys who fly them love 'em. It's the flag-rank officers that hate them.
I'm not sure that is the case in all instances. But regardless, as you know, the "right" answer is based on the highest rank in the room at the time … |
Weasel | 22 Jun 2015 12:14 p.m. PST |
I wonder how the A10 does when targeting a team of 4 "green men" hiding in the urban neighbourhood of the country you are supporting? |
Mako11 | 22 Jun 2015 1:31 p.m. PST |
"But regardless, as you know, the "right" answer is based on the highest rank in the room at the time …". Unless that person makes an over the top edict, like banning personnel from saying they support the Warthog, and calling such statements "treasonous". That person gets summarily fired in short order. To answer your question, Weasel, certainly better than its supposed replacement, which still isn't operational yet, and can't carry those small-diameter bombs internally, due to a major design flaw. |
Legion 4 | 22 Jun 2015 4:29 p.m. PST |
I wonder how the A10 does when targeting a team of 4 "green men" hiding in the urban neighbourhood of the country you are supporting?
That is more like Drone work … |
Jemima Fawr | 22 Jun 2015 5:36 p.m. PST |
"It's the flag-rank officers that hate them" "Yep, zoomie brass don't think they're sexy enough" I've lost count of the number of times I've pointed out that the GOC of the USAF is a career A-10 pilot… But don't let mere hard facts get in the way of a good opinion, chaps… |
Tgunner | 22 Jun 2015 6:33 p.m. PST |
Apparently they are also quite good at trashing Zentraedi Battlepods too!
|
Lion in the Stars | 22 Jun 2015 7:48 p.m. PST |
A large rock is good for trashing Zent battlepods, those things are super-squishy! And just because the USAF's Topmost Brass is an A10 driver does NOT mean that the rest of the brass like the beast. |
tuscaloosa | 24 Jun 2015 9:05 a.m. PST |
Fascinating, and surprisingly frank, article in this month's Air Force journal (the monthly, I forget the name), about the politics of getting rid of the A-10. Suffice it to say, Repubs and Democrats switch their position back and forth depending on whose Congressional seat is at risk depending on who represents the district which includes Davis-Monthan AB. (note: *not* a political commentary, just a commentary on politics affecting basing). |
Legion 4 | 25 Jun 2015 6:47 a.m. PST |
|
chrisswim | 28 Jul 2015 7:06 p.m. PST |
Did the USAF mothball some of the older A-10? If so, sell them overseas. Help those countries with a great plane. Contractors earn business. NATO diversifies a weapon system and its capability. Transfer the A-10s currently flying to the Army, USAF probably doesn't care for that. But it is a great weapon system IMHO. Specialized weapon system. |
Lion in the Stars | 28 Jul 2015 7:56 p.m. PST |
@Chrisswim: The problem is that the US Army is prohibited from operating armed fixed-wing aircraft, and had to fight to keep control of the attack helicopters (AH56 and AH64). You'd have to get Congress to change the law before the Army could take over the A10s. |
wardog | 02 Aug 2015 12:30 p.m. PST |
chrisswim read recently that the usaf will not allow the a10 to be sold overseas, mothball/scrapped is their preferred option can't find the article now. |
tadamson | 02 Aug 2015 2:39 p.m. PST |
The big problem with A-10's is that the gun can't actually penetrate Russian tanks. Plus they are easy targets for shoulder launched SAM. Sad, they are pretty and they make a very impressive noise. On the ground I'd rather have an AC-130 covering me. |
Mute Bystander | 02 Aug 2015 4:05 p.m. PST |
Not entering A-10 debate but it seems the more air support you can provide the guys on the ground the better. That said Air Forces (including my beloved USAF) are best at reconnaissance and air superiority. Also good at interdiction, and moving critical supplies/men (infantry/support troops) at shot notice. I doubt anybody can move multiple armored divisions as well as sea lift. Yes, I said something nice about the Navy and Merchant Marine – try not not to spew you coffee/tea all over the screen/keyboard… To have effective sea lift you need surface, subsurface, and airborne naval units to protect the transports/tankers/etc., that makes up sea lift. Edit: and in the end I remember the old joke about two Russian generals drinking in a Paris bistro post WW3 when you turns to the other and asks, "Did you hear that we lost the Air War?" Have to have land forces to take/hold real estate, that simple. |